People vs. Felan

A rape conviction may rest solely on the victim's credible, convincing, and consistent testimony, and the victim's alleged drug use or prostitution does not destroy her credibility; but minority in qualified rape must be proved by independent competent evidence, not by the victim's testimony alone.

Avelino Felan is the father of AAA, the complainant in this rape case. At the time of the alleged offense, Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Section 11 of Republic Act No. 7659, governed rape and made death the penalty when the victim was under eighteen and the offender was her parent.

AAA, whom the Information described as 14 years old, was asleep inside their house in Brgy. Tambulilid, Ormoc City, when her father Avelino Felan roused her at about 10:00 p.m. on February 12, 1995. According to the prosecution, Felan told her not to be afraid, removed her panty, spread her legs, and went on top of her; she resisted but he overpowered her, inserted his penis into her vagina, and made pumping movements until he satisfied himself. AAA cried because of vaginal pain. She left the house and stayed with her friends, who advised her to report the rape to Mrs. Charito Aris, a social worker of the Department of Social Welfare and Development in Ormoc City. Mrs. Aris brought her first to the police station to report the rape and then to Dr. Gloria Esmero Pastor, City Health Officer of Ormoc City, for medical examination. Dr. Pastor found that AAA's hymen was torn and concluded that the hymenal laceration could be caused by sexual intercourse.

Felan denied the accusation and branded it as AAA's fabrication out of anger at him for not giving her basic needs and for admonishing her to stop using illegal drugs. The prosecution commenced through AAA's complaint dated May 30, 1996, and an Information was filed in the RTC of Ormoc City alleging that on or about February 12, 1995, at around 10:00 p.m., in Brgy. Tambulilid, Ormoc City, Felan, by means of violence and intimidation, willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously had sexual intercourse with his own daughter AAA, a fourteen-year-old lass, against her will.

After trial, the RTC and the CA both found and considered AAA a credible witness whose testimony should be believed; the trial judge had personally observed AAA's conduct and demeanor as a witness.

• Credibility of AAA: Accused-appellant contended that the RTC and the CA erred in relying mainly on AAA's testimony because she was not a credible witness and her testimony was doubtful by reason of her use of illegal drugs, her engagement in prostitution, and her poor memory.
• Accused's Sexual Restraint: Accused-appellant insisted that he could control his sexual urge.

• Credibility of AAA: Whether the RTC and the CA erred in relying mainly on AAA's testimony despite the accused's claim that she was not credible because of illegal drug use, prostitution, and poor memory.
• Sufficiency of Evidence for Rape: Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had carnal knowledge of AAA through force or intimidation.
• Qualifying Circumstances and Penalty: Whether AAA's minority and the accused's relationship as her father were sufficiently alleged and proved to qualify the rape and impose death, or only simple rape and reclusion perpetua.
• Civil Liability and Damages: Whether the CA correctly awarded ₱50,000.00 civil indemnity, ₱50,000.00 moral damages, and ₱25,000.00 exemplary damages.

• Credibility of AAA: No. AAA's testimony was credible, convincing, and consistent with human nature; the trial judge's assessment, affirmed by the CA, is binding absent overlooked facts, and her alleged drug use or prostitution did not destroy her credibility or negate rape.
• Sufficiency of Evidence for Rape: Yes. The prosecution established the elements of rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, through AAA's positive identification and corroboration by Mrs. Aris and Dr. Pastor.
• Qualifying Circumstances and Penalty: No as to death; only simple rape. Although the Information alleged AAA's age, the State did not present a birth certificate, baptismal certificate, or other competent document to prove minority; the relationship was alleged and proved as an aggravating circumstance.
• Civil Liability and Damages: Yes. Civil indemnity of ₱50,000.00 and moral damages of ₱50,000.00 are affirmed; exemplary damages of ₱25,000.00 are proper because the relationship was an aggravating circumstance under Article 2230 of the Civil Code.

• Credibility of AAA: The SC applied the rule that a rape conviction may rest solely on the victim's credible, convincing, and consistent testimony. AAA gave a complete and credible narration of her ordeal and positively identified Felan. The RTC and the CA both found her credible; the trial judge had personally observed her conduct and demeanor, and the CA affirmed that assessment, making it binding on the SC absent a showing that facts or circumstances of weight were overlooked, misapprehended, or misinterpreted. Felan made no such showing. His denial was self-serving and uncorroborated, so it could not overcome AAA's positive declarations and identification. AAA's good motive to impute so heinous a crime to her own father was not disproved; the SC considered it highly inconceivable for a daughter to impute incest rape to her father unless the imputation was the plain truth, quoting People vs. Javier on the psychological depravity required to concoct such a story. The attack on AAA's credibility based on illegal drug use and prostitution deserved no consideration: her moral character was immaterial because there was no nexus between it and the rape, and even a prostitute or woman of loose morals could be raped because she could still refuse a man's lustful advances. The SC cited People vs. Montesa, People vs. Lantano, and People vs. Agsaoay, Jr.

• Sufficiency of Evidence for Rape: Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Section 11 of Republic Act No. 7659, defines rape by carnal knowledge of a woman through force or intimidation. The SC found that the State competently and sufficiently established the elements beyond reasonable doubt. AAA's testimony showed that Felan roused her from sleep, removed her panty, spread her legs, went on top of her, overpowered her resistance, inserted his penis into her vagina, and made pumping movements until he satisfied himself; she cried from vaginal pain. Her testimony was corroborated on material points by Mrs. Aris and Dr. Pastor and by documentary evidence. Dr. Pastor found AAA's hymen torn and concluded that the hymenal laceration could be caused by sexual intercourse. On this record, the SC affirmed the conviction for simple rape.

• Qualifying Circumstances and Penalty: Under Article 335, as amended by Section 11 of Republic Act No. 7659, rape is qualified and punishable by death if it is alleged and proved that the victim was a minor during the commission of the crime and the offender was her parent. The Information alleged that AAA was 14 years old, but the State did not duly establish minority because no birth certificate, baptismal certificate, or other competent document showing her age was presented; her testimony about her age without independent proof was insufficient. The SC thus held that only simple rape was established and that the CA correctly imposed reclusion perpetua. The father-daughter relationship, however, was alleged in the Information and duly proved during trial. Citing People vs. Mira, the SC noted that when either one of the qualifying circumstances of relationship and minority is omitted or lacking, that which is pleaded in the Information and proved by the evidence may be considered an aggravating circumstance; here, the relationship was an aggravating circumstance.

• Civil Liability and Damages: The SC affirmed the CA's award of ₱50,000.00 civil indemnity and ₱50,000.00 moral damages, consistent with prevailing jurisprudence, without need of a pleading and proof. It also affirmed the ₱25,000.00 exemplary damages. Because the crime was committed with the aggravating circumstance of relationship, Article 2230 of the Civil Code allowed exemplary damages as part of the civil liability in criminal offenses when the crime was committed with one or more aggravating circumstances. The SC cited People vs. Dalisay, People vs. Gragasin, People vs. Arcosiba, and People vs. Mira.

• Credibility of the rape victim — A rape conviction may rest solely on the victim's credible, convincing, and consistent testimony. The trial judge's assessment of credibility, when affirmed by the CA, is binding on the SC absent a showing that facts or circumstances of weight were overlooked, misapprehended, or misinterpreted. Applied because AAA's testimony was complete and credible, and Felan showed no overlooked facts.
• Victim's moral character — The victim's moral character is immaterial in rape prosecution; there is no nexus between it and the crime. Even a prostitute or a woman of loose morals can be raped. Applied to reject the attack based on AAA's alleged drug use and prostitution.
• Proof of minority in qualified rape — Minority must be alleged and proved beyond reasonable doubt; the victim's testimony about her age, without independent proof such as a birth certificate, baptismal certificate, or other competent document, is insufficient. Applied to reduce the conviction from qualified rape to simple rape.
• Relationship as aggravating circumstance — When one of the qualifying circumstances of relationship and minority is omitted or lacking, the circumstance that is pleaded in the Information and proved by the evidence may be considered an aggravating circumstance. Applied because the father-daughter relationship was alleged and proved, supporting exemplary damages.
• Denial as defense — Denial is self-serving and uncorroborated when not supported by evidence, and cannot overcome positive declarations and positive identification by the victim. Applied because Felan's denial did not overcome AAA's testimony.
• Damages in rape — Civil indemnity and moral damages may be awarded without need of pleading and proof; exemplary damages may be imposed when the crime is committed with an aggravating circumstance under Article 2230 of the Civil Code. Applied in the amounts awarded.

• "In a prosecution for rape, the accused may be convicted solely on the basis of the testimony of the victim that is credible, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things, as in this case." — The SC stated the rule that allowed conviction on AAA's testimony alone, after finding it credible, convincing, and consistent with human nature.
• "Although the information alleged that the victim was only 14 years of age at the time of the rape, the State did not duly establish such circumstance because no birth certificate, or baptismal certificate, or other competent document showing her age was presented. Her testimony regarding her age without any independent proof is not sufficient." — The SC held that the Information's allegation of AAA's age was not enough to qualify the rape, because the State failed to present independent competent proof of minority.
• "In People v. Mira, we observed that "when either one of the qualifying circumstances of relationship and minority is omitted or lacking, that which is pleaded in the information and proved by the evidence may be considered as an aggravating circumstance."" — The SC used this rule to treat the father-daughter relationship as an aggravating circumstance after minority was not proved, thereby supporting exemplary damages.
• "a certain amount of psychological depravity for a young woman to concoct a story which would put her own father to jail for the rest of his remaining life and drag the rest of the family including herself to a lifetime of shame." — The SC explained why it found AAA's accusation against her own father credible and why Felan's denial failed.

• People vs. Montesa, G.R. No. 181899, November 27, 2008, 572 SCRA 317 — Cited to support the rule that a rape conviction may rest solely on the victim's credible, convincing, and consistent testimony.
• People vs. Lantano, G.R. No. 176734, January 28, 2008, 542 SCRA 640 — Cited on the weight given to the trial judge's assessment of a witness's credibility and demeanor.
• People vs. Agsaoay, Jr., G.R. Nos. 132125-26, June 3, 2004, 430 SCRA 450 — Cited for the rule that the victim's moral character is immaterial in rape prosecution and that even a prostitute may be raped.
• People vs. Javier, G.R. No. 126096, July 26, 1999, 311 SCRA 122 — Cited for the observation that it takes a certain amount of psychological depravity for a young woman to concoct a story that would send her own father to jail.
• People vs. Mira, G.R. No. 175324, October 10, 2007, 535 SCRA 543 — Cited for the rule that when either relationship or minority is omitted or lacking as a qualifying circumstance, the pleaded and proved circumstance may be considered aggravating; also cited on proof of age.
• People vs. Dalisay, G.R. No. 188106, November 25, 2009, 605 SCRA 807 — Cited to support the award of civil indemnity.
• People vs. Gragasin, G.R. No. 186496, August 25, 2009, 597 SCRA 214 — Cited to support the award of moral damages.
• People vs. Arcosiba, G.R. No. 181081, September 4, 2009, 598 SCRA 517 — Cited to support the award of exemplary damages.

• Article 335, Revised Penal Code, as amended by Section 11 of Republic Act No. 7659 — Defines rape by carnal knowledge through force or intimidation and imposes death when the victim is under eighteen and the offender is her parent. The SC applied it to convict Felan of simple rape because force or intimidation and carnal knowledge were proved, but minority was not independently established; relationship remained an aggravating circumstance.
• Article 2230, Civil Code — Allows exemplary damages in criminal offenses when the crime was committed with one or more aggravating circumstances. The SC applied it to justify the ₱25,000.00 exemplary damages because the father-daughter relationship was an aggravating circumstance.
• Republic Act No. 9262 — Cited in the footnote as the basis for withholding the victim's real name and using fictitious initials. The SC used "AAA" to protect AAA's privacy.